Changes

'''Historicism''' is a term which applies to a [[number ]] of theories of [[culture ]] or historical [[development ]] which [[place ]] the greatest weight on two factors:# that there is an [[organic ]] succession of developments, # that local [[conditions ]] and peculiarities influence the results in a decisive way

It can be contrasted with [[reductionism|reductionist]] theories which suppose that all developments are [[individual ]] and ''[[ad hoc]]''.

The [[#Biblical historicism|Biblical use]] of the [[word ]] denotes Bible prophecy which is [[interpreted ]] as [[being ]] related to [[church ]] history, as opposed to any type of [[interpretation]].

The term has developed different and divergent, though loosely related, [[meanings]]. Elements of historicism appear in the writings of [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|G.W.F. Hegel]], an influential [[philosophy | philosopher]] in [[Nineteenth Century | 19th-century]] [[Europe]], as well as in those of a [[philosopher ]] he is said to have influenced heavily, [[Karl Marx]]. The term is also associated with the empirical [[social ]] [[sciences ]] and the [[work ]] of [[Franz Boas]].

[[Post-structuralism]] uses the term [[New Historicism]], which has some connections to both anthropology and [[Hegelianism]].

The historicist [[position ]] proposed by Hegel suggests that any [[human ]] [[society]] and all human activities such as [[science]], [[art]], or [[philosophy]], are defined by their history, so that their [[essence ]] can be sought only through [[understanding ]] that history. The history of any such human endeavor, moreover, not only builds upon but also reacts against what has gone before; this is the source of Hegel's famous [[dialectic]] teaching usually summed up by the slogan "[[thesis]], [[antithesis]], and [[synthesis]]." (Hegel did not use these [[terms]], although [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte|Fichte]] did.) Hegel's famous aphorism, "Philosophy is the history of philosophy," describes it bluntly.

Hegel's position is perhaps best illuminated when contrasted against the atomistic and reductionist view of human societies and social activities [[self]]-defining on an ''ad hoc'' basis through the sum of dozens of interactions. Yet [[another ]] contrasting [[model ]] is the persistent metaphor of a [[social contract]]. Hegel sees the [[relationship ]] between individuals and societies as organic, not atomic: even their social [[discourse ]] is mediated by [[philosophy of language|language]], and [[language ]] is rooted in [[etymology]] and unique [[character]]. It thus preserves the culture of the [[past ]] in thousands of half-forgotten frozen [[metaphor]]s. To [[understand ]] why a person is the way he is, you must put that person in a society: and to understand that society, you must understand its history, and the forces that shaped it. The ''[[Zeitgeist]]'', the "Spirit of the Age," is the [[concrete ]] embodiment of the most important factors that are acting in human history at any given [[time]]. This contrasts with teleological theories of [[activity]], which suppose that the end is the determining factor of activity, as well as those which believe in a [[tabula rasa]], or blank slate, view, where individuals are defined by their interactions.

These [[ideas ]] can be taken in several directions. The [[Right Hegelians]], [[working ]] from Hegel's opinions [[about ]] the organicism and historically determined [[nature ]] of human societies, took Hegel's historicism as a justification of the unique destiny of national groups and the importance of [[stability ]] and institutions. Hegel's conception of human societies as entities greater than the individuals who constitute [[them ]] influenced nineteenth century [[romantic nationalism]] and its twentieth century excesses. The [[Young Hegelians]], by contrast, took Hegel's [[thoughts ]] on societies shaped by the forces of social [[conflict ]] for a [[doctrine ]] of [[progress]], and attempted to chart a course that would manipulate these forces to lead to various improved outcomes. Karl Marx's doctrine of "historical inevitabilities" and [[historical materialism]] is one of the more influential reactions to this side of Hegel's [[thought]]. Significantly, [[Marx's theory of alienation]] comes [[full ]] circle to the thought of the [[Hegelian ]] [[right]], arguing among [[other ]] things that [[capitalism]] disrupts the rooted nature of traditional relationships between [[workers ]] and their work.

Hegelian historicism is related to his ideas on the means by which human societies progress, specifically the [[Hegelian dialectic | dialectic]] and his conception of [[logic ]] as reflecting the inner essential nature of [[reality]]. Hegel attributes the [[change ]] to the "modern" [[need ]] to interact with the [[world]], where as ancient [[philosophers ]] were self-contained, and medieval philosophers were monks. In his History of Philosophy Hegel writes:

:"In modern [[times ]] things are very different; now we no longer see philosophic individuals who constitute a [[class ]] by themselves. With the [[present ]] day all [[difference ]] has disappeared; philosophers are not monks, for we find them generally in connection with the world, participating with [[others ]] in some common work or calling. They live, not independently, but in the relation of citizens, or they occupy [[public ]] offices and take part in the [[life ]] of the [[state]]. Certainly they may be private persons, but if so, their position as such does not in any way isolate them from their other relationship. They are involved in present conditions, in the world and its work and progress. Thus their philosophy is only by the way, a sort of luxury and superfluity. This difference is really to be found in the manner in which outward conditions have taken shape after the building up of the inward world of [[religion]]. In modern times, namely, on account of the reconciliation of the worldly [[principle ]] with itself, the [[external ]] world is at rest, is brought into [[order ]] - worldly relationships, conditions, modes of life, have become constituted and organized in a manner which is conformable to nature and [[rational]]. We see a [[universal]], comprehensible connection, and with that individuality likewise attains another character and nature, for it is no longer the plastic individuality of the ancients. This connection is of such [[power ]] that every individuality is under its dominion, and yet at the same time can [[construct ]] for itself an inward world." {{fact}}

This view that entanglement in society creates an indissoluble bond with expression, would be an influential question in philosophy going forward, namely, the requirements for individuality. It would be taken up by [[Nietzsche]], [[John Dewey]] and [[Michel Foucault]] directly, as well as in the work of numerous artists and authors. There have been various responses to Hegel's challenge. The Romantic period focused on the ability of individual [[genius ]] to transcend time and place, and use the [[materials ]] from their heritage to fashion works which were beyond determination. The modern would advance versions of John Locke's infinite malleability of the human [[animal]]. Post-[[structuralism ]] would argue that since history is not present, but only the [[image ]] of history, that while an individual era or power [[structure ]] might focus on a [[particular ]] history, that the contradictions within the story would hinder the very purposes that the history was constructed to advance.

Within [[anthropology]] and other sciences which study the past, historicism has a different [[meaning]]. It is associated with the work of [[Franz Boas]]. His [[theory ]] took the [[diffusionist]] [[concept ]] that there were a few "cradles of [[civilization]]" which grew outwards in circles, and merged it with the [[idea ]] that societies would [[adapt ]] to their circumstances, which is called [[historical particularism]]. The [[school ]] of historicism grew up in response to unilinear theories that social development reflected adaptive fitness, and therefore existed on a spectrum. While these theories were espoused by [[Charles Darwin]] and many of his students, historicism was neither anti-selection, nor anti-evolution. However, it attacked the [[notion ]] that there was one [[normative ]] spectrum of development, instead focusing on how local conditions would create adaptations to the local [[environment]]. What was adaptive for one region might not be so for another.

The primary method of historicism was emprical, namely that there were so many requisite inputs into a society or [[event]], that only by focusing on the data available could a theory of the source be determined. In this view, grand theories are unprovable, and instead intensive field work would determine the most likely explanation and history of a culture. Hence, historicism. Boas would later teach at [[Columbia University]] and this would produce a school of thought based on his ideas.

This view would produce a wide range of definition of what, exactly, constituted culture and history, but in each [[case ]] the only means of explaining it was in terms of the historical particulars of the culture itself.

[[Karl Popper]] used the term ''historicism'' in his influential books ''The Poverty of Historicism'' and [[The Open Society and Its Enemies]], to mean: "an approach to the social sciences which assumes that ''historical prediction'' is their primary aim, and which assumes that this aim is attainable by discovering the 'rhythms' or the 'patterns', the 'laws' or the 'trends' that underlie the evolution of history" (p. 3 of ''The Poverty of Historicism'', italics in original). Karl Popper wrote with reference to [[Hegel]]'s theory of [[history]], which he criticized extensively. However, there is wide dispute as to whether Popper's description of "historicism" is an accurate description of Hegel, or more a [[reflection ]] of his own [[philosophical ]] antagonists, including [[Marxism-Leninism|Marxist-Leninist]] thought, then widely held as posing a challenge to the philosophical basis of the [[Western world|West]], as well as theories such as [[Spengler]]'s which drew predictions about the [[future ]] course of events from the past.

In [[The Open Society and Its Enemies]], Popper attacks "historicism" and its proponents, among whom as well as Hegel he [[identifies ]] and singles out [[Plato]] and [[Marx]] — calling them all "enemies of the open society". The objection he makes is that historicist positions, by claiming that there is an inevitable and [[determinism|deterministic]] pattern to [[history]], abrogate the [[democracy|democratic]] [[responsibility ]] of each one of us to make our own free contributions to the evolution of [[society]], and hence lead to [[totalitarianism]].

Since the 1950's, when [[Lacan]] and [[Foucault]] argued that each epoch has its own [[knowledge ]] [[system]], which individuals are inexorably entangled with, many [[post-structuralist | post-structuralists]] have used ''historicism'' to describe the view that all questions must be settled within the [[cultural ]] and social context that they are raised in, answers cannot be found by appeal to an external [[truth]], but only within the confines of the norms and forms that phrase the question. This version of historicism holds that there are only the raw [[texts]], markings and artifacts that [[exist ]] in the present, and the conventions used to decode them. This school of thought sometimes goes by the [[name ]] of ''New Historicism''.

The same label, ''new historicism'' is also employed for a school of [[literary ]] scholarship which interprets a [[poem]], [[drama]], etc. as an expression of the power-[[structures ]] of the surrounding society. [[Stephen Greenblatt]] is an example of this school.

Within the context of 20th century philosophy, the conflict over whether ahistorical and immanent methodologies were sufficient to understand meaning — that is to say, what you see is what you get [[positivism ]] — or whether context, background and culture are important beyond the mere need to decode [[words]], phrases and references. While post-[[structural ]] historicism is relativist in its orientation, that is, it sees each culture as its own [[frame ]] of reference, a large number of thinkers have embraced the need for historical context, not because culture is self-referential, but because there is no more compressed means of conveying all of the relevant information except through history. This view is often seen as being rooted in the work of [[Bennedetto Croce]]. [[Recent ]] philosophers in this [[tradition ]] include [[Thomas Kuhn]].